About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17
made without a miranda warning or made while he's not really competent between times when he's sedated and not sedated. so they may be risking their death penalty, but they may be doing it for a good reason. they may need realtime intelligence, but i don't think that the public safety exception will stand up for allowing them not to have given the miranda warnings. >> fascinating. in fact, i have a lot of questions about that i'm going to get to. and actually i want to bring in another colleague as well right now. steve razor is a former military judge advocate general and knows a thing or two about this military issue. typically, steve, we hear about a 48-hour window and this is a very new area of justice. this has only been in sort of parlay for the last couple of years. we are far outside of that 48 hours by today. but can it be extended in the case of public safety? and exactly when can you establish that a public safety exemption has expired or is no longer of concern? how long can you keep him from getting miranda? >> well, there's no hard and fast rule on that. and that's exactl
, the first appearance was with judge marianne boulder and she was there to review his miranda rights with him, among other things. you've been hearing a lot about miranda rights. there's issue at play here that need to be clarified. we're going to read a couple of the things said from the hearing. we have the transcript. the judge said, quoting here, you have been charged with one use of a weapon often mass destruction and malicious destruction of property resulting in death. the case is being prosecuted in part by william weinreb. the maximum penalty on each count is death or imprisonment for any terms of years, or life. and there was this finding from the judge, and this one is important. quote, i find that the defendant is alert, mentally competent, and lucid. he is aware of the nature of the proceedings. okay? so that is the basis for the discussion. joined by retired superior court judge isaac borenstein in boston. he's done hospital visits over his 22 years as a judge. let us begin with the idea, confusion and frustration about miranda rights. give them right away, if you don't give the
, this investigation still very much continuing. justice departments saying the suspect will not be read his miranda rights. they are invoking the public safety exception. it's allowed in cases of immediate danger. meanwhile mccain and lindsay graham said dzhokhar tsarnaev should be treated as a potential enemy combatant. they said now that the suspect is in custody is the last thing we should want is for him to remain silent. under a law of war we can hold the suspect to a enemy combatment not entitled to miranda warnings or the appointment of counsel. the older brother, he was killed on friday, and they investigated him at the request of a foreign government, and they did not find any ties to terrorism. and we are joined from london by a counterterrorism expert, and mike sullivan here is a former acting director of the bureau of tobacco, firearms and explosives. let's start with you in london, will. the fbi talked to this man in 2011. it does beg the question, did they miss something when they talked to tamerlan tsarnaev? >> well, it's always very difficult to say. however, having said that, if yo
reading him miranda rights. what does that mean for any information they might be getting? >> well, it's very important to the people -- we've been talking a lot about miranda and i think it's important for people to understand what it does and doesn't mean. if you are questioned without your miranda rights, all that means is that the statements you make cannot be used against you in a criminal court. they can be used against other people. they can be used as leads to other inquiries. and you can still be prosecuted with lots of other evidence. all it means is that those statements cannot be used against you. from what it certainly appears there is lots of other evidence against this fellow. so the fact that the government might be giving up the chance to use some of it is not much of a sacrifice on the part of the government. >> he also at this point could indicate he wants an attorney and doesn't want to answer any questions, correct? >> absolutely. even when someone doesn't get miranda rights, the statements still have to be voluntary. he can't be tortured. he can't be waterboarded.
be charged as early as today. investigators have not read him his miranda rights unwhat they call the public safety exception clause. so they may use any information he reveals as evidence in court. let's bring in christopher tritico, he defended the oklahoma city bomber, timothy mcveigh. christopher, thanks very much for coming in. he is a u.s. citizen. he was -- he received his naturalized citizenship last september 11th, of all dates. he's obviously in a hospital. crime was committed in the united states. if they don't read him his miranda rights right away, you okay with that? >> well, look. i think the public safety exception is being greatly and overly expanded in this instance. the public safety exception as the supreme court laid out is for an instance when an officer walks up on a situation and sees an empty holster and says where's your gun. that's to prevent an imminent threat from happening right then. what they are doing now is really expanding that public safety exception to say really the fifth amendment applies when they say it does and i don't think the supreme court is goin
analyst. the 19-year-old has not been read his miranda rights. why does this matter what has it allowed for? what is the issue here? >> a lot of variables here, the question is he in any kwan condition to answer questions with or without miranda? what is his health situation? also, even if he doesn't get miranda warnings, he may decline to answer questions in any case. they can't force him to answer questions, but if he does not receive miranda warnings and if he then anticipates questions those answers cannot be used in a criminal case against him. they can be used for intelligence gathering. they can be used if there are other conspirators who may be prosecuted, can't be used against him. other evidence can be used against him. may be lots of other evidence. if you don't get miranda warnings, your statements i can't be used against you. >> so this is a sensitive issue. another sensitive issue raised by republican senators, lindsey graham, kelly ayotte, peter king, they released a statement, the suspect, based upon his actions, clearly is a good candidate for enemy combat tant status.
be charged as early as today. investigators did not read him his miranda rights when he was captured. they invoked what they call the public safety exception. it permits law enforcement officials to interrogate a suspect and use that information as direct evident in court, and that is causing some controversy out there. let's talk about that. we'll talk about that in a few moments. also want to talk about other issues. joining us, former u.s. attorney doug jones who led the prosecutor against eric ruduffel, the 1996 atlanta olympic bomber. thank you for joining us. first of all, let's talk about this video. this video that has now surfaced that cnn has confirmed, a well known jihadist in dagestan who himself was killed in december, the video was posted on tamerlan tsarnaev's youtube channel. since then, it's been deleted. what does that say, if you're a u.s. attorney investigating this case, what does that say to you? >> well, wolf, i think it would be one of two things. there obviously could be some contact since he traveled over that way. there could have been some contact. there c
in the decision. but they detoured not too far over. >> the decision not to read him his miranda rights even though at one point you see him getting out of the boat, in that picture he is conscience. how did that decision come about? >> this is a federal case involving a terrorism situation and i was not aware that in the federal system there can be a removal or a discontinuation of miranda rights in emergency situations. so that's exactly what happened. the united states attorney's office advised us not to administer miranda rights. we gave that information out to our officers and i think all law enforcement was operating under those rules of engagement. >> back to the apartment real quickly. there were devices found in the apartment but you can't comment on what? >> no, i didn't say that. i can't comment on any evidence that was found there. sglp anything that was found in the apartment. are you confident that these two were acting alone and that there are no more suspects out there? >> i'm confident that they were the two major actors in the violence that occurred. i am very, very sure th
of public safety exception before you give him his miranda rights, all that talk of naming him as an enemy combatant, all of that is moot right now. they've gone forward with the official proceedings. >> well, they may have used the public safety exception, and apparently they were using it to question him, and he responded in some way given his medical condition. but certainly now that he has a lawyer, that period, however long it was, is over. and you're right, the enemy combatant thing was a nonstarter from the never going to happen. this is a criminal case in federal court in massachusetts, and that's where it will stay until it's resolved one way or another. >> it's going to take a while. thanks very much, jeffrey. much more on what's going on in this boston investigation coming up here in "the situation room" 0. >>> also, another terror plot released today, new information. canadian authorities announcing the arrest of two men believed to be part of a terror plot to attack a passenger train that may have been heading towards the united states, the plot said to have an alleged connect
miranda rights. >> >> not not at all. he'll be entitled to his american rights and i think if we don't do that, we become less of ourselves. we are americans. we have beauties in this system. we some problems in the system. i think if we do anything other than embrace what america is all about, then the terrorist would have won and i think that is the absolute wrong thing to do. >> congressman, thanks so much. good to see you. appreciate it. >>> we know now that 19-year-old dzhokhar tsarnaev will face federal terrorism charges and with all the photographs and video, is the case a slam dunk for prosecutors? we'll look into that next. i have low testosterone. there, i said it. how did i know? well, i didn't really. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody... that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor. we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% (testosterone gel
dzhokhar tsarnaev to investigators, we do not know if that was before or after he received his miranda warnings or before or after he obtained counsel. that's an excellent point. one of the things we do know that he is saying apparently is that it was his brother tamerlan who was the mastermind here. is that something that could be helpful to his defense if he was merely following his brother? >> well, it will be helpful to his defense in the sense of mitigating the penalty that he might end up suffering. from what i've read and what i've seen, he's clearly as culpable as his brother. the videos that they picked up, and the statements that he made to the driver of the suv, all would indicate that he was a willing participant in this crime, and also the fact that he fled from the scene would further indicate his willingness to participate in this crime. however, any influence that he might have suffered from his brother, his brother's influence on him, may again go to mitigate any penalty that might be imposed upon him. whether he ends up getting the death penalty or whether he ends up
, let me come over to you, a lot of talk about miranda. but give me a sense of what the leeway is especially in situations like this, after acts like what happened here at the marathon. >> well, it is yesterday's news. he's been given his miranda warnings and probably anything he said without his miranda warnings is not going to be needed by the government or the prosecution. remember, they did not indict him as a terrorist, that's very important. they indicted him as an ordinary murderer, anybody who wants to kill their mother-in-law, business partner and makes an improvised explosive device and kills them is just as guilty under the statute indicted as osama bin laden might be. this is not a terrorist prosecution. they don't have to prove intent to terrorize, intent to intimidate. they can prove their case just through the videotapes. now, i predict there are going to be two types of possible defenses in this case. number one, the jihad defense. i did it, i'm proud, i'm happy, please kill me, i want to join my brother in paradise. i'm a martyr. the other, my brother made me d
a former federal prosecutor. we now that dzhokhar, suspect number two, has been read his miranda rights. sow won't be designated as an enemy combatant. but if he was labelled an enemy combatant, he wouldn't have been entitled to a lawyer and a jury trial. they could have asked him a lot of other questions without a lawyer present that may or may not be relevant to national security. now why did they make this decision not to go for enemy combatant status? do they think they have so much evidence in this case that they can go ahead with the civilian jury trial and they don't need to hide behind enemy combatant? >> i think that is certainly part of it. it does look like an overwhelming body of evidence. more than that, they thought they could get the immediate information they needed by the miranda exception, the public safety exception so they could make sure the public was safe. there accident seem to be an constitution aal basis to treat someone that commits a crime like this on our soil. the supreme court has upheld treating an american, the american taliban hamdi captured in afghanis
are told he had not been given his miranda rights. do you have any sense of whether he has this morning or how soon it will be before he does receive them? >> the -- the decision not to read miranda rights was made by the federal officials. this is a unique clause to the terrorism law that we've not dealt with at the local level before. so, we are standing by and watching that at this point in time to see how that develops. but, the lawyers are involved in the decision, and certainly we're very anxious to talk to him, and the investigators will be doing that as soon as possible. >> commissioner over the weekend i heard you say you believe you found evidence your offices did you believe that these brothers were planning some kind of another attack, or at least prepared for it. tell us about that. >> the two suspects were armed with handguns at the scene of the shoot-out. and there were multiple explosive devices, including a large one that was similar to the pressure cooker device that was found on boylston street. i saw that with my own eyes. i believe that the only reason that someone
the question this is exactly the whole issue going back to the miranda, if he had the public safety concern of what were those explosive devices intended for? that's one of the reasons they wanted to talk to him or one of the things thaw wanted to talk to him about at the time before they realized how severely hurt he was. it absolutely proves the point there could have more more attacks planned or another person who was a part of it who maybe at the last minute didn't do it. another reason to think there was more planned is maybe that's why they didn't kill themselves at the time of the marathon attack. they wanted to live to attack another day. >> jeff, somebody must have trained them. can you learn to build a bomb by yourself just by going to the internet and going out there, go to a home depot and buying this kind of stuff? >> you could try to learn, but what you would certainly want to do is rehearse. you don't want to go through the operational energy that it would take to mount an attack like at the marathon without having a fair degree of confidence that your device is going to work
was given his miranda rights? >> we don't know as of yet. he has been read his miranda rights. but we don't know if this information came before or after. as you know there was a public safety exemption before he was read his miranda rights. so there was time when law enforcement had the opportunity to talk to him before he had quote/unquote lawyered up. but we don't know yet whether or not this information came before he said he understood his rights, or after. >> all right, jake tapper, terrific reporting. great to have you here this morning. >> thanks, john. >> don't miss "the lead" every day at 4:00. we're also learning more this morning about -- we're learning more this morning about criminal complaints against tsarnaev detailing step by step how the deadly attack on the boston marathon unfolded. our coverage continues this morning with miguel marquez outside best israel deaconess medical center right here in boston. good morning, miguel. >> good morning, john. this is the criminal complaint that contains what we expect are the first charges. we'll see many more against mr. tsarnaev.
. just to confirm, this -- dzhokhar tsarnaev has not yet been read his miranda rights, correct? >> i have to say i don't know. because there was an initial appearance today, that's why this complaint is out. the circuit executive, the administrator of this area, has put out a statement saying there was an initial appearance before a magistrate judge. that is as far as i understand it an arraignment. i have never heard of an arraignment without an attorney present. they didn't mention an attorney present. if an attorney is present, the attorney will simply say to the client, you -- don't answer questions. at that point, the attorney is the person the prosecutor is supposed to deal with. i have to say, there is information out there that we don't have. whether an attorney was present, whether this was an actual arraignment, i think we just need to hold off on that until we get more information. >> we're holding off. still so early this all happened. >> before we let deb feyerick go and chase down that lead she was referring to, deb, i was wondering, is there anything else that stands out in
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17